However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 29, 2014, the Defendant: (a) lent KRW 17,00,000 from the victim Franchis Capital Co., Ltd. for a loan under the pretext of the purchase of a vehicle for a while in order to use the vehicle for a second time; and (b) concluded a mortgage contract on the said vehicle under the name of the Defendant on July 30, 2014; (c) registered the said vehicle under the name of the Defendant on August 1, 2014; and (d) established a mortgage on the said vehicle for the victim on August 1, 2014.

On November 2014, the Defendant borrowed KRW 2 million from a non-name loaner and transferred possession of the said vehicle as security, thereby hindering the victim from exercising his rights by concealing the said vehicle which became the object of the victim's rights.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Complaint;

1. Original Register of Automobile Registration;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to applications for loan to enzygn vehicles and industrial re-loan;

1. Relevant Article 323 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution [the scope of recommended punishment] [the grounds for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of recommended punishment] lack of basic area (6 months to one year) (the person who has been in charge of special sentencing] (the decision of sentencing] (the decision of sentencing was not reached or has not been recovered from damage), but the defendant is against the victim, and there was no previous conviction other than the previous conviction of the fine, the degree of damage, motive and circumstance of the crime, the character, conduct and environment of the defendant, etc. should be taken into account.